Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Personnel Exchange

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Personnel Exchange

    In light of how the upcoming deployment to Chad has highlighted the current inability to provide our own air assets to a mission devoid of sufficient air support, a Personnel Exchange Program with other air arms, both pilot and ground crew would be one of the obvious first steps in developing such a capability.
    As such does or has the Air Corps ever operated such a program whereby air and ground crew operate with other air arms for a fixed term? Conversely have the air or ground crew of other air arms ever served fixed term exchanges here?

  • #2
    God fearing, Catholic, Neutral Ireland send our poor boys of to fight in some big mullukers war, you must be joking!!
    Unless of course you count the Argentinian Navy, the American Civil War, The First World War, The Second World War and the RIR. Although I suppose they never really started in the Irish Defence Forces.

    Comment


    • #3
      I believe crews were sent over on a gunnery course and possibly on a low level/nvg course with the RAF too.

      I personally don't see the point in training crews if they're never likely to have to use the skills.

      They need the equipment in addition to the skills.

      Like I posted in the AW139 thread; I don't understand how a Corps has remained so far removed from the needs of the army. I don't understand how the purchase of PC-9's could/can be justified when the Air Corps still doesn't possess an even minor deployment capability.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Jetjock View Post
        In light of how the upcoming deployment to Chad has highlighted the current inability to provide our own air assets to a mission devoid of sufficient air support, a Personnel Exchange Program with other air arms, both pilot and ground crew would be one of the obvious first steps in developing such a capability.
        As such does or has the Air Corps ever operated such a program whereby air and ground crew operate with other air arms for a fixed term? Conversely have the air or ground crew of other air arms ever served fixed term exchanges here?
        That Personnel Exchange Program would be great as long as the nick the host's aircraft and fly them here.
        sigpic
        Say NO to violence against Women

        Originally posted by hedgehog
        My favourite moment was when the
        Originally posted by hedgehog
        red headed old dear got a smack on her ginger head

        Comment


        • #5
          I was aware of the tactical low level and gunnery training in the UK but is this a matter of policy or merely an extraordinary circumstance?

          Pym I wouldn't rule out the possibility of Air Corps rotary asset deployment overseas in the medium to long term. Of course that would involve upgrading of current equipment and fleet expansion to cope. A minimum airlift capability is also a must in order to provide short notice spare parts resupply. A good precursor to a foreign deployment would be a detachment's participation in an overseas exercise either through PfP or the Nordic Battle Group. Until we see something as basic as that taking place we can forget about the Air Corps deploying to a theatre of operations. If something like that becomes a matter of course, then an overseas deployment for the AC is imminent.

          However, a Personnel Exchange Program is a much easier way of developing capabilities in the short term, and could take place without the above mentioned equipment upgrades and purchases. Again this could take place through PfP or the Nordic BG.

          Edit : PS Groundhog just noticed congrats on passing 6k posts!
          Jetjock
          Commandant
          Last edited by Jetjock; 1 December 2007, 12:00.

          Comment


          • #6
            I believe SAR crews may have gone over to RAF Bawdy in Wales and sometime RAF crews came here for short term joint training (as in a couple of days).

            Comment


            • #7
              Were those detachments to Bawdy for Emergency Egress training or did A/C crews cross train on RAF aircraft?
              The type of exchange program I envisage would involve AC pilots flying with an overseas air arm for a fixed number of months and would extend to operating with them on an approved overseas peace keeping/enforcement EU or UN deployment. All knowledge gained would be invaluable to working towards putting the AC in a position to deploy overseas themselves. It would also involve foreign air crew operating here as part of the exchange, thus no reduction in man power at Baldonell.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Jetjock View Post
                Were those detachments to Bawdy for Emergency Egress training or did A/C crews cross train on RAF aircraft?
                The type of exchange program I envisage would involve AC pilots flying with an overseas air arm for a fixed number of months and would extend to operating with them on an approved overseas peace keeping/enforcement EU or UN deployment. All knowledge gained would be invaluable to working towards putting the AC in a position to deploy overseas themselves. It would also involve foreign air crew operating here as part of the exchange, thus no reduction in man power at Baldonell.
                What air force/army would in their right mind send one of their own pilots over here to fly Bertie and Co. to the races and do the odd flight to the glen?
                Everyone who's ever loved you was wrong.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Can you quote the number of hours flown MATS transport vs hours Army and Naval Support by the Air Corps??

                  I suggest you do your research before making a comment like that.

                  2006 figures:

                  MATS (GIV, Lear 45, SKA and heli's) : 1427.6 hours

                  Army and Navy Support (helis, FR172) : 1824.3

                  Subtract the hours flown by the dedicated MATS aircraft(amounting to 245 missions out of 470 total) and you have a much higher percentage of Army support missions flown than MATS.


                  just for interest sake the rest of the figures(source: Flying In Ireland, November 2007):

                  Training: 4927.4 hours
                  ATCP: 2 285.6 hours
                  MarPat: 1520 hours
                  Air Amb: 265 hours
                  Civil Assist/PR: 205 hours
                  Maintenance: 203 hours
                  Service Support: 185.4 hours
                  SAR : 0.83 hours

                  This translates into just shy of a 25% increase in flying hours in 2006 over 2005. Things are moving in the right direction at the 'Don.
                  Jetjock
                  Commandant
                  Last edited by Jetjock; 2 December 2007, 16:47.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Army support, doing what?
                    Hours only show time in the air not what use it was to the Defence Forces. If you actually looked at the hours flown in recent years by the 172s, for instance, how much was actual ops versus inforced hour burning to improve the GOCs cost Vs hours produced by the Air Corps.
                    Hours are statistics and can be bent to the users needs. The true measure of the service is the happiness of the customer. As the Army are the rightful customers of a 'Corps' how many Army personnel here believe the Air Corps provide a good and benefical asset to the Army?

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Tadpole View Post
                      As the Army are the rightful customers of a 'Corps' how many Army personnel here believe the Air Corps provide a good and benefical asset to the Army?
                      We have to beg another country to give us helicopters so we can go to Chad. Nuff said.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        As the Army are the rightful customers of a 'Corps' how many Army personnel here believe the Air Corps provide a good and benefical asset to the Army?
                        The Army are the customers

                        what the fkcu type david brent double speak is that

                        we are not the customers of the Air Corps- neither are we the customers of the Signals corps or such like

                        I have found the new fangled Air Corps to be a proffessional bunch of comrades
                        only too willing to provide Air transport on the various exercises we have scheduled

                        well done to the boys and hairy girls in blue
                        Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
                        Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
                        The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere***
                        The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
                        The best lack all conviction, while the worst
                        Are full of passionate intensity.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Hedgehog,
                          I meant no insult to the Army or Air Corps by the use of the word customer. If you prefer insert end user.
                          I would not doubt that the heli operators are very professional and willing to work on prearranged exercises but what else do they provide to the DF.
                          As an example how many times have they had a 24hr stand by response to Army requirements in their history? When will they do it with the new aircraft as their current primary task is to set up an Air Ambulance response, again nothing for the DF.
                          How many encamped training missions or operations have they taken part in? Will they start now?
                          In my mere opinion their professionalism isnt in question, their usefulness Vs cost to the DF is?

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Tadpole View Post
                            When will they do it with the new aircraft as their current primary task is to set up an Air Ambulance response, again nothing for the DF.
                            That is one of the most mis-informed pieces of information I have ever seen posted on this site. Where on earth did you get an idea like that?

                            Air Ambulance missions account for a minuscule 2% of overall flight time, and an extremely worthy and noble 2% it is . 90 missions total in 2006. The surprising thing is that of the total 265 hours flown, 142 were flown by the Casa's.

                            Air Corps helicopters flew a grand total of 78 hours.

                            The primary missions of the new helicopters are Training and Army support. They have the capability to have an Air Ambulance mission kit fitted out at short notice when the call arrives. Under no circumstances is or will Air Ambulance be a primary tasking. It falls firmly into the category of a very worthwhile secondary tasking.

                            I would suggest before commenting on a subject and making sweeping inherently false statements that you first research the facts.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              While it would be very beneficial for us to send bods abroad on a"personnel exchange" the other side wouldn't benefit much at all. So such an arrangement would be a bit of a joke considering how little the visiting pilot would gain here.
                              Everyone who's ever loved you was wrong.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X